TI NE5532 Audio Opamp Changes

[EEVblog]

It shows up in the NE5532's weaker output stage that TI puts the "lipstick on a pig" by deleting any such revealing specs. 600 ohm drive is a basic requirement in pro-audio for many decades.

It is still technically specced into 600ohms, but they have removed the Vop-p spec into 600 ohms.

[floobydust]

It shows up in the NE5532's weaker output stage that TI puts the "lipstick on a pig" by deleting any such revealing specs. 600 ohm drive is a basic requirement in pro-audio for many decades.

It is still technically specced into 600ohms, but they have removed the Vop-p spec into 600 ohms.

How the op-amp is actually doing at that heavy load - you need to know if it's crapping out.
Reduced output stage capabilities - what a snake must then do is scrub that, hide the graphs, delete the numbers:
"Removed Maximum peak-to-peak output voltage swing, Small-signal differential-voltage amplification, Maximum output-swing bandwidth, Output impedance, Crosstalk attenuation" - all deleted!
The TI 2015 datasheet had 'em. Why not update the datasheet to modern standards that include THD etc. at load? Unless you're hiding stuff.

Legacy part's spec: 10V_RMS drive into 600Ω, 100kHz power bandwidth at load V_OUT=±14V R_L=600Ω V_CC=±18V
A long time ago, alternate NE5532's met this original claim (National Semi listed the LM833 as their "drop in replacement" for the NE5532, despite it only being rated for 2kΩ loads).

I expect the part to meet or exceed the original's performance instead of laundering the old part's datasheet.

Your old spec table seems to be for the NE5534 as it gives two comp cap values 0pF, 22pF yet the NE5532 has no comp pins. TI datasheets are full of mistakes.

[EEVblog]

Just did a video on it:

[David Aurora]

I didn't hear it mentioned in the video, but the Huaxuanyang 5532 also had the 5V/µS slew rate...

[pope]

Just did a video on it:

Thanks Dave. May I ask why the video is unlisted? IMO more people should aware of the f*ckup

[DimitriP]

I don't have a production line to worry about,
but I like having some unobtainium stashed away so I don't have to worry about it, "just in case".

So ...what does Mouser and Digikey have in stock?. Original or "less crispy" or no way to tell ?

[EEVblog]

Thanks Dave. May I ask why the video is unlisted? IMO more people should aware of the f*ckup

Youtube videos are best released at certain times. And I post to Patreon before release.

[David Aurora]

I don't have a production line to worry about,
but I like having some unobtainium stashed away so I don't have to worry about it, "just in case".

So ...what does Mouser and Digikey have in stock?. Original or "less crispy" or no way to tell ?

This was the response I got from Digikey:

Thank you for contacting DigiKey , sorry we do not have the Revision info  for these , for the NE5532P the last time we got them in from the manufacturer was 04/02/2026

For the NE5532AP the last time we got them in from the manufacturer was 05/22/2026

Per the data sheet the revision to K took place in December 2025

DigiKey is unable to provide part specific details of stock prior to shipment. If there are any special requirements for your order, please include them into the order notes and DigiKey will attempt to accommodate.

[pope]

I don't have a production line to worry about,
but I like having some unobtainium stashed away so I don't have to worry about it, "just in case".

So ...what does Mouser and Digikey have in stock?. Original or "less crispy" or no way to tell ?

No way to tell but most likely the shitty ones. You could get a few and do a diode test between pins2-3

[16bitanalogue]

I hate to say it, but the truth of the matter is that you don't matter. You are not the driving force for sales. The current long-tail buyers will get a PCN, and then have a decision to redesign or look for a new supplier.

It's a sad truth that I have heard over the years, "College students? Individuals? We need to focus on 'real" customers!" - Mr. MBA.

[squadchannel]

Have you seen Dave’s new video?
Even that PCN makes no mention of these major changes at all.
It just says that they changed the wafer and the fab.

[Alex Nikitin]

Emotions is all very well, however I would like to see some practical outcomes. For starters (and in a separate pinned thread) we need to create a repository to exchange all practical information about these counterfeit parts, including the ways and methods to distinguish the fake stuff. From manufacturing dates to a simple input diodes test for NE5532 and NE5534, to a bit more complicated but quite feasible measurement of the resistance between the offset adjustment pins (1 and 8 ) to the + supply pin (7) on the OPA134 and NE5534 (both measure 10-12K on the real thing), all the way to proper electrical tests to separate sheep from goats.

Cheers

Alex

[pope]

I hate to say it, but the truth of the matter is that you don't matter. You are not the driving force for sales. The current long-tail buyers will get a PCN, and then have a decision to redesign or look for a new supplier.

It's a sad truth that I have heard over the years, "College students? Individuals? We need to focus on 'real" customers!" - Mr. MBA.

There are stories online where the current long-tail buyers found out the hard way about the changes.

[RoGeorge]

TI is selling fake TI chips. 

[16bitanalogue]

Have you seen Dave’s new video?
Even that PCN makes no mention of these major changes at all.
It just says that they changed the wafer and the fab.

I work in the industry, and looking at the revision history several changes are on page 1 (Marketer's page - I use the term in a derogatory manner). Then you have changes to the ABS MAX table which no one should be operating near; although, ESD being downgraded from 2000V to 1000V may be a concern. I have former colleagues who would argue 2000V is overkill and a hold over since time immemorial. The slew rate change is unfortunate.

Having been in these very meetings I am sure the applications/systems/design engineers would have pounded on the table, but it is certainly a business decision.

"Hey engineer, we are making these changes. Will these be an issue for customers?"
"It's an op-amp, they are used in all sorts of circuits, so the answer is Yes. You could very well lose customers."
"The numbers I crunched tells us the loss in revenue will not be impactful. Colleague students and hobbyists after all."

This is not a made up conversation.

[tooki]

I hate to say it, but the truth of the matter is that you don't matter. You are not the driving force for sales. The current long-tail buyers will get a PCN, and then have a decision to redesign or look for a new supplier.

It's a sad truth that I have heard over the years, "College students? Individuals? We need to focus on 'real" customers!" - Mr. MBA.

Having been in these very meetings I am sure the applications/systems/design engineers would have pounded on the table, but it is certainly a business decision.

"Hey engineer, we are making these changes. Will these be an issue for customers?"
"It's an op-amp, they are used in all sorts of circuits, so the answer is Yes. You could very well lose customers."
"The numbers I crunched tells us the loss in revenue will not be impactful. Colleague students and hobbyists after all."

This is not a made up conversation.

Whatever gave you the idea that it is college students and hobbyists who are concerned about this issue??

[Kleinstein]

Collage students are the lesser issue - maybe you confuse them with the Ti NE5532 being so much different from most others. They tend to get a new datasheet for a new design.
The big issue is with old designs used by commercial customers. There is a good chance that some audio designs go higher and maybe run the NE5532 at 18 or 20 V to get extra headroom. This would be OK for the old part, but bad for the new one.
There are also a few users that use the NE5532 for other things than audio and they may be effected by the other changes:
lower slew rate, missing input clamping diodes, other sign of bias current. This would likely not be large volume users of the 5532, but may still be valuable customers for other parts.

There is absolutely no excuse to not have markings on the part to tell the old and new version apart. Just the paper lable on the box is not enough. As just shown not even Digikey can't tell for sure if the parts they have are the old or new chips.
Those parts are essentially useless for professional users - right on par with parts from the gray market.
This stunt may help with a few sales of NE5532 (until they get the reputation for frequent failure), but it will hurt the brands reputation.
They will soon have a good reason the EOL the NE5532 and maybe have to sell the new part and a different name.

[Yansi]

...and with at least 5x the price of NE5532 you forgot to add.

[David Hess]

About avoiding TI part, I'm not sure there are alternatives it comes to high-spec opamps.. IMO only two companies specialize on that: TI and AD. AD being even worse in terms of availability and price.

So, for generic parts an Asian opamp would be fine, but if you need precision, or high-end audio opamp, then it's TI (may be AD). Or if you need a detailed datasheet.

It really bothers me because parts like the OP140 series are so good.

The big issue is with old designs used by commercial customers. There is a good chance that some audio designs go higher and maybe run the NE5532 at 18 or 20 V to get extra headroom. This would be OK for the old part, but bad for the new one.

Tektronix used to do their own grading of common parts like the 36 volt 741 for operation at 44 volts like the higher voltage version.  I do not know why they did not just buy the higher voltage version.

There is absolutely no excuse to not have markings on the part to tell the old and new version apart. Just the paper lable on the box is not enough. As just shown not even Digikey can't tell for sure if the parts they have are the old or new chips.
Those parts are essentially useless for professional users - right on par with parts from the gray market.
This stunt may help with a few sales of NE5532 (until they get the reputation for frequent failure), but it will hurt the brands reputation.
They will soon have a good reason the EOL the NE5532 and maybe have to sell the new part and a different name.

That is why I was thinking that Texas Instruments is trying to ruin the NE5532 market for everybody; tarnish the reputation of the NE5532 to sell your own more expensive boutique parts.

[Echo88]

INA128U with the same PCN problem 2022: slew rate and settling time degradation depending on random chip site origin.
"INA128U: The die is manufactured in CSO: SHE or CSO: FRE."
"Changed typical slew rate specification from 4V/μs to 1.2V/μs in Electrical Characteristics"
 
https://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/ina128.pdf

[ve7xen]

Would be interesting to measure the 'deleted' specifications on one of the new production chips. I guess they can probably by identified by country of origin.

My guess would be it's a remarked RC4580. Which if it is the case, it looks like where the NE5532 spec is 'worse' than the RC4580, they mostly haven't modified the datasheet to match since it still fits within the old spec, but where it's worse they are forced to change the specsheet. Makes it even more slimy to me that they'll keep the worse spec on the books to obscure what they're actually doing.

If they don't want to make the old part any more, just discontinue it and offer the 4580 (or whatever) as a replacement? This is ridiculous.

[HwAoRrDk]

I had a feeling that Zeptobars would have at some point featured a de-capping of the NE5532, and after a search, I was right:

https://zeptobars.com/en/read/Ti-NE5532-real-vs-fake-opamp

I wonder if the new TI NE5532 now looks more like the 'fake' die shown there. Guess they'll have to do a follow-up now of "real vs real".

It's ironic that they note "I afraid it got at bit of bad fame due to fakes which have quantitatively slower slew rate and sound objectively worse".

[Yansi]

Did they decap RC4580? Would now be very interesting to compare the dies. 

[Alex Nikitin]

https://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/ina128.pdf

 

Read the data sheet. Lifted my jaw from the floor, after some effort. Promised to myself never again use any TI parts made less than five years ago, unless there is no alternative whatsoever.

Cheers

Alex

[Kleinstein]

...
That is why I was thinking that Texas Instruments is trying to ruin the NE5532 market for everybody; tarnish the reputation of the NE5532 to sell your own more expensive boutique parts.

It may make some sense for the NE5532. However they do similar nonsense also with the TL072 and OPA134 (offset pins) and maybe other parts.
The CMOS TL072H is not a bad part and in some applications it is better than the origianl. However if you don't know what you get of have it is a nightmare. AFAIK for the TL07x Ti is still the main source and the alternative LF35x seam to be effected as well. The TL07x don't have the best reputation, but at least not for reliability and the CMOS version is even higher voltage.

Unclear markings make unhappy customers. Doing the same mistake several times is plain stupid - more like sabotage.